Discretionary medical reporting of potentially unfit drivers: a questionnaire-based survey in Southeast Switzerland

In Switzerland, every physician has the right to report a patient that is potentially unfit to drive to the licensing authority without violating medical confidentiality. Verified information regarding physicians' attitudes concerning this discretionary reporting and the frequency of such reports are not available. In order to answer these questions, 635 resident physicians were sent a questionnaire. The response rate was 52%. On average, the responding physicians--for all specialties--reported 0.31 patients (SD 0.64, 95% CI 0.24-0.38) in the year before the survey and 1.00 patient (SD 1.74, 95% CI 0.81-1.20) in the past 5 years. Seventy-nine percent of the responding physicians indicated knowing the current legal requirements for driving in Switzerland. In applied logistic regression analysis, only two factors correlate significantly with reporting: male sex (odds ratio 5.4) and the specialty "general medicine" (odds ratio 3.4). Ninety-seven percent of the physicians were against abolishing medical discretionary reporting and 29% were in favor of introducing mandatory reporting. The great majority of the questioned physicians supported the discretionary reporting of drivers that are potentially unfit to drive as currently practiced in Switzerland. The importance and the necessity of a regular traffic medicine-related continuing education for medical professionals are shown by the low number of reports per physician.

The Role of the European Imperial Powers throughout the Armenian Schism in the 1870s

The Bull "Reversurus" (1867) and its dogmatic legitimization at the First Vatican Council in 1870 caused not only ecclesiastical controversy and Schism in the Armenian Catholic Church, but it had also wide political consequences for the Armenian Catholics in the Ottoman Empire. The conflict originally between the Armenian Catholics and Rome attracted very soon the attention of the European imperial Powers. France, the British Empire, the German Empire, Austria-Hungary and Russia were the main political powers who were involved in the Armenian affair. A full picture of the role of all these powers for the course of the Armenian Schism is missing. Mostly the role of France is foregrounded in the printed sources, as the main power, which supported the papacy to win during the Armenian affair. The role and the motives of the other imperial powers is almost missing. This article will try to describe as completely as possible the historical and political background, which brought to the escalation of the Armenian conflict beyond the national frontiers and led to number of conflicts at the international and transnational level. It will be shown that the imperial policy in Europe in the 19th century have played an enormous role throughout the Armenian Schism. It will be explained that several historical circumstances in Europe, especially the relation of the European imperial powers to each other as well as their expectations from the Ottoman Empire and its Armenian subjects were decisive for the duration and conclusion of the Armenian Schism.